FLORENCE v. COUNTRYMAN

Filing 58

ORDER directing Respondent to re-serve 41 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on Petitioner and to file a certificate of compliance within SEVEN (7) DAYS. Petitioner shall submit her response to the motion to dismiss no later than November 1, 2024. Thereafter, Respondent may file any desired reply within fourteen (14) days. Ordered by US MAGISTRATE JUDGE AMELIA G HELMICK on 9/24/2024. (mlb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION
KIM CAMILLE FLORENCE,
Petitioner,
v.
Sheriff GREG COUNTRYMAN,
Respondent.
_________________________________

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Case No. 4:23-cv-125-CDL-AGH

ORDER
On March 22, 2024, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 41)
Petitioner’s recast habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 23).
On May 28, 2024, the Court received a “response” from Petitioner in which she
indicated that she had received the Court’s notification of the motion to dismiss, but
that she had not received the “actual” motion to dismiss. Pet’r’s Resp. 2, ECF No.
50.
In light of Petitioner’s failure to receive Respondent’s motion to dismiss,
Respondent is DIRECTED to re-serve a copy of the motion to dismiss on Petitioner
and to file a certificate of compliance with the Court within seven (7) days of the
date of this Order. No later than November 1, 2024, Petitioner should submit her
response to the motion to dismiss. Once the Court receives Petitioner’s response,
Respondent may file any desired reply, including any supporting documentation,
within fourteen (14) days.

Petitioner is advised that she should specifically address, as concisely as
possible, Respondent’s arguments that Petitioner failed to exhaust her state
remedies, and that the relief Petitioner seeks is barred pursuant to Younger v. Harris,
401 U.S. 37 (1971), because those two issues are the only issues before the Court at
this stage of the proceedings. If Petitioner fails to respond to and rebut Respondent’s
arguments, the Court could accept those arguments as being accepted and
uncontested, and Respondent’s motion to dismiss could be granted. If that were to
happen, there would be no further proceedings on Petitioner’s habeas application.
Should Respondent’s motion to dismiss be denied, Petitioner will have an opportunity
to make arguments regarding the merits of her habeas application.
SO ORDERED and DIRECTED, this 24th day of September, 2024.
s/ Amelia G. Helmick
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2